Proposal Log

Every proposed change, its status and its disposition, in public.

Feedback is accepted at any time at [email protected]. Each proposed change receives a stable identifier and appears here on the day it is received, with a non-identifying summary. The Institute reviews it and records one disposition and the reason. The Executive Director releases accepted changes as minor versions, unless the change is major under the rule in About. This log records changes to the doctrine. Presentation, formatting, links and citations are corrected directly and are not logged. A received entry is not adopted doctrine. A private attachment may protect sensitive evidence but never replaces the visible issue, review and disposition. See how changes are accepted and released.

Summary

Entries by status as of the latest update to this page.
StatusEntries
Received (no disposition yet)6
Incorporated8
Accepted pending implementation1
Deferred with a condition0
Rejected with reason0
Duplicate with a surviving identifier0

This log opened on 1 November 2026. Entries are listed in order received.

Open entries

Entries not yet incorporated. Accepted and deferred entries keep an owner or condition and stay visible until resolved.
IDAreaSummaryStatusOwner, condition or next step
CHG-0009Standards mappingsMappings to external standards still cite RFC 001 criteria (C1.1 and similar) next to a notice that they are historical.Accepted pending implementationOwner: web team and Executive Director. Condition: each mapping restated against R01 to R18 using the recorded successor map, with source quotations verified against the primary source.
CHG-0010PillarsThe pillar-to-requirement links are an editorial aid, not normative.ReceivedAwaiting confirmation by the Institute: keep as labeled navigation aids, or remove.
CHG-0011Release ruleWhether wording changes that preserve the meaning of a Law should count as a major version.ReceivedAwaiting a decision of the Executive Director on the wording of the R25 major-version rule.
CHG-0012R16 evidenceDetecting a deleted, altered or reordered record should not depend on a secret held by the operator of the governing system, not only on a verifier other than the acting agent.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-0013R03, R07Each governed action should be bound to an authorization issued by the mission originator outside the agent, its prompt and its self-authored state.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-0014R10 revocationWithdrawal of an upstream grant should invalidate authority derived from it in downstream systems before the next governed effect, as a stated bound rather than a profile-declared one.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-0015Assessment, Law 5Verification of required human approval should examine recorded approval rates and decision latency per authorizer, so that habitual approval cannot satisfy it.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.

All entries

Every entry, with its disposition and reason.
IDReceivedAreaSummaryDispositionReason and result
CHG-00012026-11-01Law 2Some pages still described Law 2 as control during execution, the v3.6 wording.IncorporatedAligned with v4: protected enforcement before each effect, with pre-commit rechecks when material conditions can change.
CHG-00022026-11-01MaturityPages described maturity as deciding which controls apply now and which are deferred, or how far autonomy can extend, and used the retired name and Level labels.IncorporatedRestated: the baseline (R01 to R18) applies to every deployment, and the Organizational Maturity Evaluation defers no requirement and licenses nothing.
CHG-00032026-11-01Doctrine textQuotations and slogans attributed to the doctrine did not appear in v4.IncorporatedReplaced with paraphrases of, or links to, the v4 Laws and action classes. RFC 001 wording is attributed to RFC 001.
CHG-00042026-11-01RFC 001RFC 001 was described as open for comment, and the v3.6 changelog referred to a revision 3 that was never published.IncorporatedRFC 001 revision 2 is a historical proposal preserved as published, linked to its v4 successors. The Conformance Layer glossary entry points to the Assessment Companion.
CHG-00052026-11-01Release ruleTwo different rules stated what makes a release major.IncorporatedOne rule, taken from the R25 wording, used wherever the rule is stated.
CHG-00062026-11-01R25The identifier R25 appeared without a definition, and the public change log was stated as an obligation before it existed.IncorporatedR25 defined as the Institute’s own process requirement, separate from R01 to R18 and R19 to R24. This log is the public change log.
CHG-00072026-11-01The LawsThe Laws were called non-negotiable, though the doctrine names three non-negotiables.IncorporatedLaws described as foundational principles.
CHG-00082026-11-01Threat SurfaceA claim that the Threat Surface predated external guidance conflicted with the changelog.IncorporatedReplaced with a dated statement: the section was added in v3.0 (11 to 12 May 2026). The mapping records convergence, not independence of origin.
CHG-00092026-11-01Standards mappingsMappings to external standards still cite RFC 001 criteria (C1.1 and similar) next to a notice that they are historical.Accepted pending implementationOwner: web team and Executive Director. Condition: each mapping restated against R01 to R18 using the recorded successor map, with source quotations verified against the primary source.
CHG-00102026-11-01PillarsThe pillar-to-requirement links are an editorial aid, not normative.ReceivedAwaiting confirmation by the Institute: keep as labeled navigation aids, or remove.
CHG-00112026-11-01Release ruleWhether wording changes that preserve the meaning of a Law should count as a major version.ReceivedAwaiting a decision of the Executive Director on the wording of the R25 major-version rule.
CHG-00122026-10-30R16 evidenceDetecting a deleted, altered or reordered record should not depend on a secret held by the operator of the governing system, not only on a verifier other than the acting agent.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-00132026-10-30R03, R07Each governed action should be bound to an authorization issued by the mission originator outside the agent, its prompt and its self-authored state.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-00142026-10-30R10 revocationWithdrawal of an upstream grant should invalidate authority derived from it in downstream systems before the next governed effect, as a stated bound rather than a profile-declared one.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.
CHG-00152026-10-30Assessment, Law 5Verification of required human approval should examine recorded approval rates and decision latency per authorizer, so that habitual approval cannot satisfy it.ReceivedUnder Institute review against the v4 baseline.